What is?

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

It appears that way to Rob because he is Stupid with a capitol S. I didn't say numbers ARE being fiddled with. I insinuated that they COULD be fiddled with. You know, reading and comprehension was taught pretty early in school and the more I deal with Rob the more I realize some people are just given jobs, no skills required.

So you're saying the red states may not be as red as we think? Ie, somebody is/could be artificially inflating the percentage of GOP vs Dem voters?

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Nobody has to answer to you Rob.

Least of all you. You couldn't answer to ANYONE who asks you to back up any of your bullshit claims.
Mommy and daddy (if he stuck around) must have spoiled you REAL good. Anything you feel/believe/opine is fact. Because...YOU.
Great job little child; here's your participation trophy. You are a winner because you spoke.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Least of all you. You couldn't answer to ANYONE who asks you to back up any of your bullshit claims.
Mommy and daddy (if he stuck around) must have spoiled you REAL good. Anything you feel/believe/opine is fact. Because...YOU.
Great job little child; here's your participation trophy. You are a winner because you spoke.

Sounds like you are speaking from experience. Or you just listen to the extreme left for all your life's guidance.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Sounds like you are speaking from experience. Or you just listen to the extreme left for all your life's guidance.

Definitely from experience. You’ve never answered when I’ve asked you to back up your claims.
You just tap dance around, avoiding the questions. Much like now, where you bring up what you think are my political leanings, in order to explain YOUR entitled attitude.

The list grows.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

So you're saying the red states may not be as red as we think? Ie, somebody is/could be artificially inflating the percentage of GOP vs Dem voters?

I don't know about inflating numbers or none of that but I don't believe most states are as hard line one side or the other as is hyped up...certain districts or cities absolutely are...

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

I don't know about inflating numbers or none of that but I don't believe most states are as hard line one side or the other as is hyped up...certain districts or cities absolutely are...

I agree. Even Texas has it's blue areas (ie Houston).

Most Republican States 2023

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

I don't know about inflating numbers or none of that but I don't believe most states are as hard line one side or the other as is hyped up...certain districts or cities absolutely are...

True. It's not always an overwhelming tilt, but if the state consistently leans in a direction with every election, would you consider it fair to say they are definitely "red" or "blue", as opposed to the "swing" states?
Texas voted Republican in every election from 1980 to present. I'd consider that a pretty obvious lean in one direction.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

True. It's not always an overwhelming tilt, but if the state consistently leans in a direction with every election, would you consider it fair to say they are definitely "red" or "blue", as opposed to the "swing" states?
Texas voted Republican in every election from 1980 to present. I'd consider that a pretty obvious lean in one direction.

What I find interesting is (with exceptions), the more of the state's revenue that comes from the Fed the redder they tend to be. Clearly there are exceptions, ie New Mexico is pretty blue and is a big time net taker of Federal Funds. As I mentioned earlier there is rural vs urban component and educated vs uneducated component as well. Nevertheless, some of the reddest states out there have political leaders that rail against gov't spending until it's time to cash the checks.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

What I find interesting is (with exceptions), the more of the state's revenue that comes from the Fed the redder they tend to be. Clearly there are exceptions, ie New Mexico is pretty blue and is a big time net taker of Federal Funds. As I mentioned earlier there is rural vs urban component and educated vs uneducated component as well. Nevertheless, some of the reddest states out there have political leaders that rail against gov't spending until it's time to cash the checks.

Like the one that wanted to secede until their power grid went in the shitter and people were dying indoors in 30 degree weather?

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

Like the one that wanted to secede until their power grid went in the shitter and people were dying indoors in 30 degree weather?

In all fairness Texas doesn't receive alot of per capita federal funding and they still want to secede.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

True. It's not always an overwhelming tilt, but if the state consistently leans in a direction with every election, would you consider it fair to say they are definitely "red" or "blue", as opposed to the "swing" states?
Texas voted Republican in every election from 1980 to present. I'd consider that a pretty obvious lean in one direction.

Not really...if we were talking 80% + turnout it'd be a fair assumption...but honestly too many don't vote to make overarching statements about statewide...that why I'd say it'd be more accurate to go by district...

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Not really...if we were talking 80% + turnout it'd be a fair assumption...but honestly too many don't vote to make overarching statements about statewide...that why I'd say it'd be more accurate to go by district...

I considered that, but then I also think about the people saying "your vote can make the difference". That would be assuming only people from one side choose to vote ( or choose not to).

I'm not a gambling man, but I'd wager that there is similar enough apathy/reluctance along both party lines that it cancels out any imbalance a person's failure to vote may cause.
And I'd wager there is a study out there that looks at the phenomenon.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

You have places like wa state where overwhelmingly counties outside of king and Thurston aren't blue...and it's like that in a lot of states...so to say WA is blur state wouldn't really be accurate as much as those counties are blue...

The farther from local votes get, the less impact they have...

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

You have places like wa state where overwhelmingly counties outside of king and Thurston aren't blue...and it's like that in a lot of states...so to say WA is blur state wouldn't really be accurate as much as those counties are blue...

The farther from local votes get, the less impact they have...

But what about the numbers?
Someone posted a while back about how some huge areas are red and so the sate should be red, but the huge areas were rural with very few voters. It was the urban areas that had the sheer volume of people.

Should we determine a state's "tilt" based on the number of people that actually vote, the number of people that are registered to vote, or the land mass of the voters? If Manhattan was blue, but the rest of NY was red, would we call it a red state (assuming the vast majority of the NY population is in Manhattan)?

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

You have places like wa state where overwhelmingly counties outside of king and Thurston aren't blue...and it's like that in a lot of states...so to say WA is blur state wouldn't really be accurate as much as those counties are blue...

The farther from local votes get, the less impact they have...

Agreed and you can break down all the way to neighborhoods if you want. But the country, from a Federal standpoint, is a country of states. Generally speaking Federal funds go to a state not a county. The Electoral vote is by state, Senators represent a state, etc.